The Operating Platform for Australian Plaintiff Law Firms.

For Australian personal injury firms

More claims. Same team. With Atto

• Around 100 statutory date rules already coded in: workers' comp, CTP and public liability, state by state.
• Deadlines work themselves out: calculated from the dates on the file, colour-coded overdue or due soon.
• A risk portfolio view of your matters: see your whole practice at a glance.

Follow one claim

Follow one claim, from enquiry to settlement

01 Intake

Take on the right claims

Atto screens the enquiry against the client's own words, checks limitation, runs conflict and ID checks, and drafts the costs disclosure. A lawyer approves before it's sent.

Illustrative intake: Nguyen, rear-end collision. Ready for review.

• Enquiry received: website form, 8:02 am.
• Claim screened: QLD CTP, motor vehicle, injured 2 Feb 2024.
• Limitation checked: calculated from the date of injury. On track.
• Conflict check: no conflict found.
• ID check: waiting on the client. Chasing.
• Costs disclosure and agreement: drafted from your precedent. For lawyer review.

I was stopped at the lights on Logan Road when the truck hit me from behind.

A lawyer approves before anything goes out. Clients accept through the portal.

Illustrative claim. Synthetic data, not a real client matter.

02 Records

Records requested, and chased

No request goes without signed client authority. Requests go from the lawyer's own Outlook, and Atto drafts the follow-up when a provider goes quiet.

Illustrative records request: Rivergum Hospital, R-1042. Signed client authority on file.

1. 3 Mar: Request drafted. Cites the date of injury and the treating doctor.
2. 3 Mar: Approved by Sarah Mitchell. Nothing sends without a lawyer's approval.
3. 3 Mar: Sent from Sarah's Outlook. Replies come straight back to the matter.
4. 17 Mar: No reply after 14 days. Follow-up drafted for approval.
5. 21 Mar: Records received. Filed to the matter, 42 pages.

03 Chronology

The medical story, sourced

Every visit is pulled from the records into one timeline, and every entry links to the page it came from.

Gaps in the available treatment records are flagged for lawyer review and follow-up. They show where the file needs checking, not whether treatment stopped.

Illustrative medical chronology for the Nguyen matter. The source quote opens a document preview at its source location, with the matching passage highlighted in green.

Sagittal images demonstrate a broad-based disc protrusion at L4/5 contacting the traversing nerve root.

Radiology report, page 1. Synthetic data, not a real matter.

The treatment timeline flags a 105-day gap in the available records between 04 Mar and 17 Jun for lawyer review. A gap in the records does not prove no treatment occurred.

04 Precedents

Precedent-led drafting

Your approved precedents, filled from the matter and previewed before sending. A partner approves the template, and a lawyer reviews the draft.

Illustrative notice-of-claim draft for the same Nguyen matter, using a versioned, partner-approved firm precedent. Matter fields are filled and the draft is previewed for lawyer review. Synthetic data, not a real matter.

05 AI Workbench

Answers grounded in the file

Atto reads the matter's context, firm knowledge and history. Answers cite their sources, with every cited sentence checked against the file.

Illustrative matter brief flags a due compliance notice, the treatment gap and an outstanding IME. References point to the statutory rule, chronology and IME tracker. Synthetic data, not a real matter.

06 Quantum & settlement

Work through quantum. Track every offer.

Damages worked out head by head, and every offer tracked against our demand.

Nguyen v Insurer. Working valuation.

Each head links to its inputs and evidence.

Our latest demand: $185,000. Best open insurer offer: $120,000. Open gap: $65,000.

1. 14 Aug: Insurer offered $85,000. Rejected.
2. 2 Sep: We demanded $210,000. Countered.
3. 30 Sep: Insurer offered $120,000. Open.
4. 9 Oct: We demanded $185,000. Open.

All offers plus costs. Client's estimated take-home shown after costs and refunds.

07 Firm analytics

Answers calculated from your firm's figures

For partners. Plain-English question, answer calculated from the firm's own figures.

Analytics. Lawyers. This quarter.

Which lawyers have the most overdue dates this quarter?

Sarah Mitchell has the most overdue critical dates: 28, across 6 active matters.

• Sarah Mitchell: 28 overdue critical dates.
• Michael O'Brien: 20 overdue critical dates.
• Olivia Tran: 14 overdue critical dates.
• James Park: 6 overdue critical dates.

Calculated from the firm's own dates. The AI only reads the question.

Not another AI chat box.

The old approach

On its own, an AI model knows nothing about the claim.

The Atto approach

Structure the matter once. The AI reads it. Agents work on it.

Context, knowledge and memory remain bound to one matter, with checked sources and coded Queensland, NSW and Victorian claim rules. A lawyer approves before anything goes out.

Core features of Atto PI.

One connected Personal Injury workflow. Agents handle file work. Lawyers stay in control.

• Eagle View & statutory dates: Around 100 statutory date rules for workers' compensation, CTP and public liability, state by state. See overdue deadlines and practice-wide risk.
• Medical chronology: Source-linked chronologies in table, timeline or calendar views, updated as records arrive.
• Approved firm precedents: Versioned Word precedents filled from the matter. A partner approves the template; a lawyer reviews the preview before release.
• Context, knowledge and memory: Matter facts, firm precedents and rules, plus past answers, approvals and decisions. One shared context for AI and agents.
• AI Workbench: Brief matters and flag what needs attention, using the live file. Each cited sentence is checked against its source.
• Intake agent: Screen enquiries against the client's own words. Check limitation, conflict and ID; draft costs disclosures and agreements for lawyer-approved sending. Clients accept through the portal.
• Records-request agent: Signed client authority required. Requests send from the lawyer's own Outlook after approval. A follow-up is drafted for approval; received records are filed to the matter.
• Damages & settlement offers: Calculate damages head by head and track every settlement offer.
• IME & records tracking: Track IME bookings, reports and outstanding records in one place.
• Client portal: Clients see progress and key dates, upload documents and accept agreements. A lawyer controls document sharing.
• Team analytics: See workload, overdue matters and settlement outcomes. Ask in plain English for calculated, exportable reports. Untracked data is clearly marked.
• Outlook & Word add-ins: Sync key dates to Outlook Calendar. File emails, diarise court orders and create tasks. Fill templates, redact and anonymise in Word, with lawyer review.

Join the waitlist.

Atto PI is in pilot. Leave your details and we will let you know when access opens for your firm.